In early Western history, the environment was viewed as hostile. Land was to be dominated, conquered, and used. It is interesting to note, however, that the concept of evaluating human impacts on the environment is not entirely new as indicated by the following quote related to the assessment of European mining projects in 1556:

". . . the strongest argument of the detractors is that the fields are devastated by mining operations... Also, they argue that the woods and groves are cut down, for there is need of an endless amount of wood for timbers, machines, and the smelting of metals. And when the woods and groves are felled, then are exterminated the beasts and birds, very many of which furnish a pleasant and agreeable food for man. Further, when the ores are washed, the water which has been used poisons the brooks and streams, and either destroys the fish or drives them away. . . . Thus, it is said, it is clear to all that there is greater detriment from mining than the value of the metals which the mining produces."¹

Gradually, awareness of the "nonutilitarian" functions of the environment was communicated through artists, poets, and writers such as Catlin, Thoreau, and Emerson. Early "conservationists" such as John Muir emerged in the late nineteenth century voicing concern over the degradation of the environment and pushed environmental concerns into the political arena. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, President Theodore Roosevelt made resource conservation a priority of his administration and several monumental efforts were made to conserve natural resources. ²However, this "land management" scheme of preservation still did not address the ever more demanding issues of industrial pollution and human waste.³

Historically, the plans for new development and the implementation of projects were evaluated primarily on the objectives of economic efficiency.⁴ Until the last few decades, interest was mainly in how the environment affected people. Only recently has interest developed in how human actions influence the environment.⁵

This perspective was heightened in the 1960s when many people voiced a view that public works were degrading the quality of the environment. Projects such as highways, power plants, and water projects were destroying scenic landscapes, polluting the air, and draining or flooding unique ecological areas. Critics argued environmental consequences were not being included in governmental decision making. Instead, decisions were made with traditional criteria for economic efficiency.⁶

One definition of an environmental impact analysis is the "systematic identification and evaluation of the potential impacts (effects) of proposed projects, plans, programs, or legislative actions relative to the physical-chemical, biological, cultural, and socioeconomic components of the environment."⁷ Through this evaluation, the intent is to forecast the significant impacts of the project, judge its benefits and costs, and propose alternatives to the action, in order to reduce its impacts and determine whether or not to move forward with the project.⁸

The practice of environmental impact analysis in the United States is generally considered to have begun with the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969. In two decades, more than 20,000 comprehensive environmental impact statements (EIS) have been prepared. During that time, more than 500,000 environmental assessments (EA) have been produced to determine whether significant impacts would negative alter the quality of the human environment and subsequently trigger the preparation of an EIS.⁹

---